In most conventional designs of single or multi-storied buildings and residential dwellings, the movement of the foundation and the subsequent response of the building which results from the occurrence of an earthquake have been calculated to utilize varying structural and architectural appointments designed to protect the building and occupants therein.
Prior art earthquake-resistive methods include the use of laminated rubber supports and dampers interposed between a building, its foundation, and the various elements which comprise the internal structure: seismic energy-absorbing building members designed to fall upon the impact of seismic stress and building flex enhancement means provided by slits in walls, support columns and the like. Additionally, internal supports in areas subjected to higher stress, such as doorways and room perimeters are incorporated to aid in the maintaining of structural stability and rigidity.
In the event an earthquake or other comparable seismic motion occurs, the safety of buildings designed according to prior earthquake-resistive designs depends on several fundamental concepts, which include, but are not limited to: the energy that is absorbed due to hysteresis characteristics and the plasticization of structures which exceed the seismic energy that acts upon the structure's internal design elements.
Conventional methods further provide some measure of quake resistance which are passive to natural external forces. These forces result, either directly or indirectly, from earthquakes, seismic motion(s), wind or the like. Therefore, due to a building's specific natural frequency, the resonance phenomena resulting from the aforementioned forces and a building's response to such cannot be avoided. The actual effect(s) are uncertain and unpredictable but predominantly adverse to the building's structural integrity and the occupant's general safety.
Thus, the need fop an earthquake protective cover under which a person or persons can stand during an earthquake is needed to assure safety. A search of the prior art did not disclose any patent that specifically disclose the earthquake protective cover of the instant invention. However, the following two patents are considered related:
______________________________________ PATENT NO. INVENTOR ISSUED ______________________________________ 5,111,543 Epshetsky, et al 12 May 1992 5,072,570 Johnson 17 December 1991 ______________________________________
The 5,11,543 Epshetsky, et al patent discloses a method for providing earthquake reinforcement for existing wood frame buildings. The method consists of providing two truss members. The first member secures the building to the foundation and the second member prevents the building cripple walls from collapsing during an earthquake. The first truss member includes structural elements and is joined to the concrete foundation. The second truss member includes a lower L-shaped beam that is bolted to an adjacent L-shaped beam located on the first truss member.
The 5,072,570 Johnson patent discloses a bed with a foldable earthquake protective cover. The cover consists of a support frame and two movable members pivotally attached to the support frame. The movable members can be pivoted between a folded position and an unfolded position in which they form a rigid cover above the bed's occupants.
For background purposes and as indicative of the art to which the invention is related reference may be made to the remaining cited patents.
______________________________________ PATENT NO. INVENTOR ISSUED ______________________________________ 4,922,667 Kobari, et al 8 May 1990 4,858,738 Novoa 22 August 1989 4,522,000 Barari 11 June 1985 ______________________________________